The Wailer 112 started a new comparison category for us called “excess fat”. Sure, DPS made the touring version of its iconic resort ski light enough to carry uphill. But skiing back down on it is cheating, pure and simple. The rockered profile perfectly integrated with the buttery sidecut makes skiing too easy. You can lean forward in powder as if you’re skiing groomers, and no one will be able to discern your actual skill level (try doing that on a skimo race ski if you think you’re so good!).
Of course, since skiing basics are covered for you by the Wailer, you might be tempted to turn it up a notch. You might not be able to resist charging at a level of aggressiveness that we simply cannot condone when you’re as far into the backcountry as the weight of the Tour1 allows. As such, we don’t recommend even tempting yourself with this ski.
3D PaddleTech Geometry tapers the sidecut as the tip and tail rise off the deck.
Balsa wood core is light but still provides good feedback as you exit a turn.
Proprietary carbon fiber laminates keep things stiff enough to perform.
Hardened P-tex bases and edges can be found on the WC racing circuit.
We generally really liked the Tour1 line. They are somewhat less stiff and damp than the Pure3s but the weight savings is significant. I'll follow up via e-mail on a setup tailored to you.
I find the description and cryptic recommendation funny but, then again, I've always appreciated Jason's sense of humor. Knowing it, this is clearly a thumbs up from Skimo Co. I would second the motion, finding the 112 Tour 1 the best ski out there for ripping big vertical in deepish to deep pow. For the amount of ski one gets, the T1 is silly light, especially when paired with a race style binding. Yes, skiing them is, indeed, cheating. Compared to the Pure 3, one has to pay slightly more attention at Mach 1 with the Tour 1 but the trade off on the up more than makes up for it.
Curious of the weight of the 168? I have a pair of Yvette 168s that are a dream but I may have to spring for these! But I'm debating between the 99 so I'm curious the weight difference between the two at 168. Thanks!
Hi AMMB, we don't have an official (measured by us) weight on the 168s yet, but projecting from the other skis, I would expect a weight in the low 1300 gram range, meaning 4-5ish ounces heavier than the 99s, which came in surprisingly light.